From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756675AbdKOHuo (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:50:44 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:43505 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1755999AbdKOHul (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:50:41 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbeBpG7o5SpIZmpf3DSTn/cGK8Kg/LLlZqPVV3077uWR77k6PN4uDPDQ2Oaqsy5BJJFiDZjKA==
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 08:50:38 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 updates for v4.15
Message-ID: <20171115075038.iqiu6kcbitltyfa3@gmail.com>
References: <20171113082421.yqxmcbnj54mdfpbi@gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFyCQP0YpqocP+bzd_jE7CvTAUQOGT=OqRRvO9_W80yRsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171114094836.mwjxm67v3uwd6t7r@pd.tnic>
 <CA+55aFx7BSo-WmBz8pPA_8Cj7E017d7Aue3VC1mAifZZdPJV-w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx7BSo-WmBz8pPA_8Cj7E017d7Aue3VC1mAifZZdPJV-w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> >
> > Just did 2 suspend cycles (once to RAM and once to disk) on my x230
> > with your tree from right now and it looks ok so far. So it could be
> > machine- and config-specific...
> 
> .. and it's not repeatable for me. I rebooted pretty quickly, and
> didn't gather a lot of information (well, 'dmesg' would SIBGUS, so..)
> and it hasn't happened again.
> 
> Will ignore until I have more information.

Haven't seen such behavior or got such reports - although admittedly laptop 
suspend/resume testing is done only sporadically, as it isn't easily automated.

As per the symptoms one thing that _could_ produce SIGSEGVs are the 
CONFIG_X86_INTEL_UMIP changes: the upcoming changes that make any UMIP action more 
verbose should make it more apparent if that's the case.

Plus, of course, anything entry code related. We did a few harmless (looking...) 
x86/mm changes as well, but none stands out at the moment.

Thanks,

	Ingo